[samtheman]

Smaller diameter would mean stronger gravity, not weaker.

As for the length of the earth day, I think that has been increasing, due to tidal friction, but at a much slower rate than would significantly effect the net gravitational force 65 million years ago.

As for the moon, I think it’s pretty well established that it was created 4 billion years ago when another planet collided with and merged with our own, blowing off the lunar chunk in the process.

I haven’t looked at your links yet, and I will. But the posted article here seems to me not real science but some kind of Däniken type silliness.

[ThePythonicCow]

Smaller diameter means stronger gravity, but faster spinning, hence more centrifugal force, hence less weight.

[ThePythonicCow]

the posted article here seems to me not real science

Yup - a good chunk of the good stuff, and 100 times as much garbage, lies outside the respected halls of accepted science.

To create new understandings, one has to hold several conflicting theories, and a variety of facts, hints and speculations in ones mind at once, playing with them like lego bricks, looking for ways they might fit together, having fun, unafraid of the silly, the unknown, the crazy.

[ThePythonicCow]

Did you look at the YouTube video in my Post #11 above? It’s a visually suggestive presentation that the earth’s continents, rather as we know them now, covered the entire surface of the earth ... a smaller surface without the great expense of oceans we have now (though likely with water covering much of what is now land.)